I heard that you guys used to allow images in signatures. How come they're not allowed anymore? Is there anything we can do to reinstate allowing images in our signatures?

I think it was because peoples signature had loads of pics in them and it took too long to scroll down through a page.

I would like if images in sigs were re-instated. Would it be possible to set a limit on the size of the image?

I think it was because peoples signature had loads of pics in them and it took too long to scroll down through a page.

I would like if images in sigs were re-instated. Would it be possible to set a limit on the size of the image?
Yeah, that's what I was thinking. There needs to be a limit, that's how other boards keep it that way.

The only way to size-limit on software side would be to restrict IMGs to whatever size was wanted, and then THAT would affect images in post.

As for just having the mods/admins self-enforce the rule: It'd just be a bit too much work than would be liked...

People always seems to abuse the images in sigs. I don't care for them at all. It is like looking a pictures of other peoples kids. Who cares... Really. All they do is take up space and bandwidth.

People already abuse the size limits with the avatars. Geesh, look at the size of some of them.

Karen, look at your signiture... It is already a freekin billboard. I would hate to see how big it would get if you were allowed to have pictures. The signiture is ment to be just that.. a signiture. Not a webpage like some people turn it into.

People always seems to abuse the images in sigs. I don't care for them at all. It is like looking a pictures of other peoples kids. Who cares... Really. All they do is take up space and bandwidth.

People already abuse the size limits with the avatars. Geesh, look at the size of some of them.

Karen, look at your signiture... It is already a freekin billboard. I would hate to see how big it would get if you were allowed to have pictures. The signiture is ment to be just that.. a signiture. Not a webpage like some people turn it into.
Your avatar size can only be 150x150. It won't allow it to be any bigger.

People already abuse the size limits with the avatars. Geesh, look at the size of some of them.


I don't think so. Avatars are set at a hard limit of 150x150 pixels. Any more and the forum software either blocks it entirely, or automatically resizes it (and I cannot, for the life of me, remember which, since I don't think I've had an avatar that size in four years - besides, it tends to change with the versions). 150x150 only looks big if you're using a tiny resolution....Avatars look perfectly normal sized in any decent resolution.

Am I the only veteran who likes it better without sig pics?

Am I the only veteran who likes it better without sig pics?
I think so. :lol:

I would like if images in sigs were re-instated. Would it be possible to set a limit on the size of the image?
yeah...another forum I go to has that...and it works fine.

People always seems to abuse the images in sigs. I don't care for them at all. It is like looking a pictures of other peoples kids. Who cares... Really. All they do is take up space and bandwidth.

People already abuse the size limits with the avatars. Geesh, look at the size of some of them.

Karen, look at your signiture... It is already a freekin billboard. I would hate to see how big it would get if you were allowed to have pictures. The signiture is ment to be just that.. a signiture. Not a webpage like some people turn it into.
a. it doesnt let you have anything bigger then 150 x 150 so no one abuses it.
b. did you really have to go and comment on Karen's sig?

a. it doesnt let you have anything bigger then 150 x 150 so no one abuses it.
b. did you really have to go and comment on Karen's sig?

I was only pointing out something that shows my point. It wasnt meant personally.

If signitures can get that big without images, imagine how big they would get if people started putting in pictures in them 1024x768

I know that is an exageration, but I have seen it happen on other forums.

I was only pointing out something that shows my point. It wasnt meant personally.

If signitures can get that big without images, imagine how big they would get if people started putting in pictures in them 1024x768

I know that is an exageration, but I have seen it happen on other forums.
Yea and it would take forever to load the pages especially if you had a slow computer like mine. :lol:

I didn't realize how many people would respond to this thread. :lol:

Anyway, I'm still all for having images in signatures. I agree with those that are for it and to just set some limits on the size of the image[s]. We could even set a character limit as well, so people can't add extra stuff if it's too big.

If it's possible, I think we should just try it out for like a day or a week or two. If things get out of hand, we can stop. But if a lot of people utilize the feature and follow the rules, then maybe we can keep it for real. Just a suggestion. ;)

I didn't realize how many people would respond to this thread. :lol:

Anyway, I'm still all for having images in signatures. I agree with those that are for it and to just set some limits on the size of the image[s]. We could even set a character limit as well, so people can't add extra stuff if it's too big.

If it's possible, I think we should just try it out for like a day or a week or two. If things get out of hand, we can stop. But if a lot of people utilize the feature and follow the rules, then maybe we can keep it for real. Just a suggestion. ;)
I agree.

I didn't realize how many people would respond to this thread. :lol:

Anyway, I'm still all for having images in signatures. I agree with those that are for it and to just set some limits on the size of the image[s]. We could even set a character limit as well, so people can't add extra stuff if it's too big.

If it's possible, I think we should just try it out for like a day or a week or two. If things get out of hand, we can stop. But if a lot of people utilize the feature and follow the rules, then maybe we can keep it for real. Just a suggestion. ;)

Agree x2

i'm against it - they are unnecessary, they take up too much bandwith and ALWAYS get abused (people can't even stick to the 10 lines of text rule)

i think that it would slow down the entire boards quite a bit, its just not worth it.

I have the signature feature disabled now because it takes up to much room.

I agree.
Why not allow each member to have one small clipart image added to their signature? And it would have to be a small size , not tiny but but too big so that it doesn't take up too much room.:idea:

Why not allow each member to have one small clipart image added to their signature? And it would have to be a small size , not tiny but but too big so that it doesn't take up too much room.:idea:
That's a good idea. :thumbsup:

Sorry, but it's not happening.

Robyrob pretty much hit the nail on the head in regards to a lot of the reasoning behind the removal last time, and why they are not coming back any time in the forseeable future.

i'm against it - they are unnecessary, they take up too much bandwith and ALWAYS get abused (people can't even stick to the 10 lines of text rule)

i think that it would slow down the entire boards quite a bit, its just not worth it.
and the boards go slow enough for me now anyway. :lol: